liz: i'm melissa francis and here's what's "money" tonight. a sacred cow may get slaughtered. the mortgage interest deduction could be on the chopping block as part of a fiscal cliff deal. will this kill any incentive to buy a home and the housing market right along with it? we'll take a look. a new report that exxonmobil has a oil shortage going on. its oil and gas output is at a 3-year low. we'll tell you why and whether you need to worry about more industry giants suffering the same fate. put your money where your mouth is.

a rapper offers a mill dollar reward for the lost laptop. when it is found he refuses to pay up. the financial fight goes to court. you won't believe who the jury has singing the blues. even when they say it's not it is always about money liz: all right. first let's take a look at the day's market headlines, will they or won't they? this is worse than an episode of "friends" i have to tell you. mixed signals from congressional leaders sent stocks whipsawing but all the major indices rose at the end of the day. the dow closed 36 points. it is something, come on. research in motion hearing words they're not used to, buy. goldman sachs upgraded company citing prospects for its upcoming blackberry 10 phone. that is huge day for rim. pandora shares rose 7%.

comscore released a new measure to measure audiences online and pan door a has 59 million unique visitors. clearly good news to investors there. liz: a change that could affect homeowners coast to coast. everyone knows one of the big reasons to buy a house to take advantage of mortgage interest deduction on your taxes. that formerly sacred and untouchable deduction is on the table for fiscal cliff talks. that costs the government $100 billion a year. you know they're looking at every rock for revenue. it would take buyers away from the house market and it could be devastating to the economy. we have lindsey piegza and dan mitchell, from the cato institute. welcome to you both. lindsey, let me start with you. we shouldn't be surprised everything is on the table here, right? >> sure.

but this is a big potential problem. it would no doubt cause prices on homes to fall? liz: to rise? >> i'm sorry. liz: if you took the mortgage deduction it would cause prices to rise. >> we would see prices fall because the demand for homes would teeter. this is big decision whether deciding to rent or purchase. you remove that incentive people will drop out of the marketplace. all of sudden a lot of potential homebuyers would-be homebuyers drop out of the marketplace and cause decline in prices up to 10%. this could really undermine any momentum we've seen in the housing market as of late. liz: that is interesting point of view because when i'm looking at buying a house you discount momently payment you will be how much you save on taxes. to me the price of owning a home would go up because i don't have the deduction. if you say falling in concert maybe the whole thing washes out then. >> the problem it just doesn't stop there. we saw in this morning's third quarter gdp report residential investment

increased 14%. so right there all of sudden we're talking about derailing the housing market recovery. that could be up to half a percentage point. consumer confidence is up to a five-year high in part because the housing market has been stablizing. so all of a sudden if we see the housing market take another head for the worse we could see consumers pull out of the marketplace and completely derail this recovery. liz: dan, everything that we talk about trying to change here to solve this problem, some group comes out from the sidelines weeping with kleenex about what's going to happen to them and to the economy as a result. whether it's, you know, seniors come out and they talk about, if you raise the tax on dividend, that is what we're living on. everybody has their tale of woe. it is all legitimate. everyone will be hurt but we've got to do something!. >> we have to do something but i don't want to give the government more money to waste. so i'm all in favor of as part of a move to a simple and fair system like a flat tax i'm all in favor of getting rid of the mortgage interest deduction even

though i've been taking that deduction for 25 years. we don't want to have politicians trying to tilt the playing field to distort economic behavior in a way that contributes to housing bubbles, that undermines investment the private economy. you look around the world, australia, canada, england, israel, there are lots of countries that don't have anything close to what we have in terms of preferences in the tax code yet they have the same rates of homeownership. liz: i hear you. i hear you. let me jump in for a minute. dan makes a fantastic point, a couple of them. one of them by virtue putting this deduction out here we're making a value judgement about encouraging it. government says homeownership is great. it hasn't been great for a little while. a lot of people got hurt in the market because the government was telling people to rush in. maybe they create distortions with this type of thing. >> of course the government's best job they create distortions in the marketplace. i agree with you and our

other guest we need to reduce those deductions make much simpler, much fairer tax code and completely eliminate those entirely. that would make sense. that would allow everyone to understand what they're paying. would put more cash in the pockets of americans, could ramp up spending an investment and get small businesses to take on new employees. liz: you're saying this would hurt the housing market in the short term but larger economic point of view if we eliminated all deductions across the board rather thanncherry-picking group that would -- >> that is the problem with washington right now we have such a short term view. we need to look at long term policies get us on the path to long term prosperity rather than putting a bandaid on the situation and getting one or two quarters of positive growth. liz: dan, if we did something like that, can you honestly say, democrats say that is all nice and good but the math doesn't work. if we eliminate all the deductions and we go to a tax code that is so much more straightforward and is more simple they will raise less revenue and we'll be in deeper hole. what do you say to that?

>> this is the problem. nobody in america or very few people anyhow trust politicians in washington. what they're talking about right now is a perfect example. they're not talking about getting rid of these deduction shuns as part of a process giving us a simple and fair and noncorrupt flat tax. they're talking about getting rid or capping deductions so they get more money to waste. math adds up perfectly if we ruse money for tax reform. 31 countries in the world have flat taxes. they're working very well but we know that crowd here in washington has the wrong idea in mind. so i'm happy getting rid of the deduction but not to give the politicians more money. liz: yeah. i hear you, dan. that is a great point. thanks to both of you. wish we had more time. great points on both sides. we appreciate it. all right, now onto the "oracle of omaha.". warren buffett changed the debate about u.s. tax reform for his call for the reach to pay more. calling for minimum tax rates for millionaires. are you kidding me?

this will not make a dent in the deficit. here to disagree with me is christian dorsey from the economic policy institute. christian, thank you so much for coming back to the show. you are always a spirited debate partner. tell me why you like this. >> i'll tell you, melissa, to me this is not so much about the revenue that it would raise but about the message and principle it stand for, that we can't in this country have a situation where people are making millions of dollars effectively paying lower tax rates than america's middle class families. the principle of this, of this rule is actually what's most important. the revenue that it raises, it is important because it is not chump change but it is not in of itself going to change our deficit conversation but the principle is one that is extremely important. liz: but you're talking about wealthier people. well thinker people pay a higher average tax rate. everybody pulls out the stat that they want to look at. if you look at average tax rate of the top 1%, it is

23%, almost 24%. i mean, the average tax rates for taxpayers across the board is 11%. they're already paying more than double what most people are paying if you look across the board at all taxes they're paying. >> actually, no, if you look at all the taxes that middle class families are paying which includes also payroll taxes, which are not necessarily at the high end, when you look at state taxes, look at a tax code much closer together than the 23-11 split you mentioned. keeping it strictly to federal income taxes we have the middle class which is at about 15%. what we have are some millionaires, some millionaires who are able to pay around 15%. that is about 22,000 in this country. and then we have about 1500 who pay no federal income tax at all. that is absolutely unconscionable. liz: you know this is only going to raise $47 billion over 10 years, $5 billion in the first year. i mean in fact, if we

decided to do this every year in order to pay down the debt it would take 3200 years in order to pay down the debt. this would run the federal government for half a day, this $5 billion or $47 billion over 10 years. it would pay the salaries for every federal civilian employee for about a week and a half. so i don't understand why this becomes, i think i do understand. why make this such a huge issue when it is such a tiny dollar amount? to me it's about turning this country into war over class warfare? >> see i think the reason it has become such a big issue because if you look at this, if you can't figure out how you make it so that millionaires don't pay zero income tax or pay less than middle class --. liz: who pays zero income tax? who got away with paying zero income tax? i like to know how you do that. >> 1500 millionaire families paid no federal income tax in 2009. and if you can't figure out a way to capture their fair

share, then how else are you going to fix the problems in our tax code? if you can't do this --. liz: i'll tell you. you close all the loopholes. you make one rate or three rates for everyone. make it very simple. so that is, that is a loophole problem. that is not a marginal rate problem. that is not a go attack wealthy people problem and discourage entrepreneurship and discourage people from trying to make money and get ahead and be successful. >> yeah. liz: when you have somebody like warren buffett out there doing this, it is about attacking wealthy people. i just don't think that is what america is about. >> warren buffett himself, among the wealthiest there is so i don't think you can accuse him of class warfare. it is not just about loopholes, melissa. liz: i think i absolutely can. he is mouthpiece for the white house. he come out time and again to do their bidding. i and i think he also lobbies the government on behalf of his investments. he gets a lot out of it. i think a lot of what he does is actually incredibly disingenuous. >> melissa, what he is talking about is the fact

that warren buffett, mitt romney, other people, derive most of their income from capital gains which are taxed at a 15% rate. that is not a loophole. that is a statutory intent of the tax code. and what you have then is the incredible amassing of wealth. liz: good. change that, you get $5 billion. change that, do that, let's do it and take it off the table. do this. you get $5 billion. >> i would love it. liz: how will that help you? >> washington is not, has not made it happen. washington has not been able to do it. liz: do you know the "buffett rule" would reduce the 10-year deficit under president obama's budget by .7 of 1%? you're talking about is .7 of 1%. this argument is about .7 of 1%. why do we keep having this conversation instead after conversation about controlling spending, about really closing this gap or doing something else to really close this gap? i mean i just wonder why this conversation keeps coming to the fore instead of one that would solve the

problem? to me it is about pitting people in this country against each other which is not going to get us anywhere. >> but, melissa, in the last year we cut a trillion dollars in spending. president obama is proposing cutting another $3 trillion in spending. we have not been able to agree on one dollar of revenue increases. that's the problem. and this rule is looking at what should be low-hanging fruit, an easy call and yet it is becoming a contentious issue. liz: only because it has become a contentious issue because democrats keep putting it out there to distract how big the gap really is and what it will take to really get there. christian, thanks so much for coming on. i always appreciate it. you make great points i really appreciate your time. >> thank you, melissa. liz: next on "money", two things you never thought you would hear together, exxonmobil and oil drought? why the company is coming up dry. how congress made fiscal cliff talks even more

aggravating to you watch today. i didn't know how that was possible but they did it. one house leader has inside track you haven't heard though. we have new information. more "money" coming up. having you ship my gifts couldn't be easier.

well, having a ton of locations doesn't hurt. and a santa to boot! [ chuckles ] right, baby. oh, sir. that is a customer. ...sorry about that. [ male announcer ] break from the holiday stress. fedex office. you know, one job or the other. the momentnt i could access the retirement plan, i just became firm about it -- you know, it's like it just hits you fast. you know, you start thinking about what's really important here. ♪

you know how painful heartburn can be. for fast, long lasting relief, use doctor recommended gaviscon®. only gaviscon® forms a protective barrier that helps lock stomach acid from splashing up- relieving the pain quickly. try fast, long lasting gaviscon®. relieving the pain quickly. why they have a raise your rate cd. tonight our guest, thomas sargent. nobel laureate in economics, and one of the most cited ecomists in the world. professor sargent, can you tell me what cd rates will be in two years? no. if he can't, no one can. that's why ally has a raise your rate cd. ally bank. your money needs an ally.

liz: potentially worrisome production numbers coming out out of exxonmobil. the company seems to suffer from a little bit of an oil shortage. over the past year production in crude oil and natural gas liquids has been falling. take a look at these numbers, for the third quarter this year produced 2.1 million barrels a day. it is down 100,000 barrels a day during the third quarter of 2011. what does it mean for the price of oil and could we see other companies suffering from those shortages? kevin kerr, president and ceo of the kerr trading international. thanks for joining us. is this an exxon specific problem or does this reflect what is going on in the industry? >> no, unfortunately it is systemwide. even the saudies are feeling it. they say we're past peak production. they admit that. this is ongoing problem, when you talk about peak oil, this is what you're talking about. the not one day we will turn

off the spigot and have not anything left. these will less enand lessen and us prices will climb as we have to get oil harder to get to. liz: is that worldwide phenomenon that? that doesn't seem to be going on here in the u.s., how much, sure there is lot of natural gas production but also a lot of oil coming from shale right here in the u.s.. >> well, exxon is doing a lot of that, melissa. i think they're betting on that that will really supplement in the past but i think they're optimistic, overly optimistic. if you look at what they're saying in the press announcements they seem very optimistic to me. i think they will run into more environmental roadblocks. we have this all over the place with the xl pipeline. that was a big draw back from them. chuck schumer, blocking that and could complaining about selling their oil to china. this affected exxon a lot. they have other projects blocked as well with permitting and other things. the window they're looking at to shore up supplies will be a lot longer than what

they're estimating because of all the other factors. liz: looking at analysis of the numbers, exxon in particular made a number of not great bets with exploration and production. >> right. liz: if you look at numbers that came out of ubs. they were saying that for 2012, on could be down 5.7%. but chevron even though it is down 2.9%. bp 2.7%. royal dutch/shell looks like decline of 2.2. oh, royal dutch/shell is higher. i didn't see that. exxon is lagging the entire group. seems like they made some bad bets. >> that's right. there is really no room for error here. he have they have to put money into fields that will produce oil and they made bad bets, as you point out. on top of headwind you finding from the shale, not producing as much as they want as quickly as they hope, natural gas reduction and xl pipeline being blocked, all these things added to a bad situation for them and the

bad bets. so really will come down to that in the future as well as these companies search for more supplies. it will get more and more expensive and passed on to us at the pump. liz: the flipside of that, one of the complaints a lot of companies pay dividend and do whatever else, don't put enough investment back in e&p, exploration and production and looking just at their stats, in 2009, you know, they invested only $20 billion, which is a lot of money but when you compare it to what they planned to invest going forward, up to 2016 they ramped up to $37 billion. that is almost a doubling what thhy plan to invest in seven years. maybe it is that they weren't investing enough in 2009? >> yeah, absolutely. there is something to that. these companies do need to reinvest more profits into the production and development. i think they will have to take a hard look at that. hard to feel sorry for exxon. huge company. liz: no. you can feel sorry for shareholders. a lot of people own that in

their 401(k). >> absolutely. liz: the bottom line if they're seeing production go down in spite of shale revolution here in the u.s., to me maybe my prices at the pump are going up. >> they are. they're definitely passing through costs to us. at the end of the day the companies will have to explore deeper, explore further, they will have to develop other technology and it will cost money. they will not take the hit. they will pass it on to us, the consumer, they should be in some ways asked to pay more, do more research and development for the good of the country as well, to some extent. that can get overused especially with the administration we have now but i think at end of the day --. liz: asked to pay more, kevin. there are only two parties in the equation. either shareholder who is paying or consumer. when you say asked to pay more. one side or the other. company is not its own entity. that is discussion forr3 another time. thanks very much for your time. >> thank you, melissa. liz: time to check the fuel gauge. oil prices snapping a three-day losing streak. strong economic data and

optimism over the fiscal cliff, warranted or not, crude closed up nearly 2%. u.s. oil demand hit a four-year low in september, very interesting. new report from the energy department fell demand fell 3 into 8% year-over-year, to about 18.2 million barrels a day. slowing economy there. chevron taking full-page ads in argentina newspapers. appealing for argentina's court to end freeze assets in the country. an argentina judge ordered freeze earlier this month on behalf of claimants in ecuador. think want a $19 billion damage stealthment. chevron says the case is fraudulent. interesting they're taking to the media. why is the u.s. sending billions of dollars to egypt in fresh aid when president morsi is becoming a dictator before our very eyes?

we'll talk about that, why that money might be better spent at home. "piles of money" coming up. ♪ look, if you have copd like me,

you know it can be hard to breathe, and how that feels. copd includes chronic onchitis and emphysema. spiriva helps control my copsymptoms by keeping my airways open for 24 hours. plus, reduces copd flare-ups. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled copd maintance treatment that does both. spiriva handiher tiotropium bromide inhalation powder does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spira and seek immediate medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells, you get hives,

vision changes or eye pa, or problems passinurine. other side effects include dry mouth and cotipation. nothing can reverse copd spira helps me breathe better. (blowing sou) ask your doctor about spiriva.

liz: breaking news right now, related to the middle east. the united nations voted to recognize palestine as a sovereign state. this just happened a short time ago. they did vote yes to recognize palestinian statehood. this as violent riots in egypt continue as president mohammed morsi addressed the nation today to try to explain his rationale for morphing into a dictator basically. here's the thing. last week morsi secured a agreement from the international monetary fund for $4 billion in loans. it was a signal that egypt was ready to tackle to economic reform. u.s. pays billions to imf fund and i'm not sure why we

should contribute to the loan. joining me is the author of the battle over islam. before we talk about egypt, get you to react to the vote in the u.n. on palestine. tell me what it means? >> if anything the timing is really bizarre, melissa. the u.n. proving how out of touch it is. hamas claiming supposedly victory when israeli finally responded appropriately to having missiles thrown at it for months of the president of egypt claiming egypt was terrorist state and claiming he brought these. state leadership in egypt but claiming regional egypt. israel is having to recognize a state-run by aterrorist organization that the united states will not even recognize because they're a terrorist group. just a very bizarre setting. >> is it bizarre or is it on purpose and very specific? >> well, it is on purpose from the u.n. it is on purpose from individuals there that want to legitimatize hamas's reaction, do this moral

equivalency dance. liz: right. >> unfortunately now it is becoming a normalization of islamism as a ideology. it is not just the brotherhood wing of hamas that is a threat. now we should start to see the regional threat of islamism from egypt and what we're funding. liz: meanwhile, that brings us right into the rest of the discussion. meanwhile as tide is turning around the world, feels like the sand is shifting beneath your feet we're sending money to the imf, turning around giving these loans to egypt. does that make sense? >> it really doesn't. melissa, so good you're bringing this up because if you look in history, every dictatorship whether nazis or others they have been able to come to power through so-called elections because they brought economic stability. the people are back on the streets in egypt for revolution 2.0 because they didn't really elect morsi. he won 25% and then won a runnoff. now they're coming back because of economic instability. the imf is giving him the

feasibility to stay in power and give them the economic stability that, if they didn't have, if we, not only the united states needs leadership from president obama to say that we're not only going to stop the one billion plus we give them in direct aid but to say to the imf, which i think will stop the loan, say we're not going to support it. barclays and others who are very afraid of sending money to a very unstable country and will pull back and allow islamists to fail. in long term they will turn into sunni type iran in egypt which will certainly not be a friend. liz: just looking at this, it is a $4.8 billion loan. we put that up on the screen but the u.s. is responsible for 17% of the fund and what goes on there. 17% of that money in theory is coming from us. do you really think someone here in the u.s., president obama hasn't been very tough on these things. do you really see him standing up saying you know what? we're out? >> he has to listen to the american people. i can't believe in looking

at national security, and looking at the evolution of who our real friend are in the middle east and egyptian people would stand to allow our president to remain silent as he has. has been silent. it is not right time to stay silent. all it is words for the imf. spokesperson for the imf said they're looking for assurances that eu and united states will stand behind these loans. if they don't get it on meeting on december 199h, i think they pull out of it. liz: yeah. >> that would be one of the ways to out of morsi and get real change for liberals the ones marching in egypt, not the thugs and theocrats running the government now. liz: real quick because we're running out of time, why should americans care about this? why is this our fight? look at seeds of change in europe and palestine and israel, why should we care about this? >> because there's global, it is not just regional, it's global. the economic impact of the cash-heavy petrodollars fueling a regionalization of islamism will eventually come back to haunt us

because we live in a economic global village that free markets are on the wane. we have to have power to help people establish individualism. it will come back to haunt our pocketbooks and haunt haunt our security. terrorism is still a threat to this day. liz: thanks so much for coming on. always appreciate it. >> thanks, melissa, anytime. liz: the contradictions coming out of congress leaves heads spinning. we'll talk to the republican chief deputy whip coming up. if you offer up a reward you have to be ready to pay it. a jury's one million dollar decision over a lost laptop redefines the phrase, lost and found. we'll explain that coming up. do you ever have too much money? ♪ it's a new day.

if you're a man with low testosterone, you should know that axiron is here. the only undarm treatment for low t. that's right, the one you apply to the underarm. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18. axiron can transfer to others through direct contt. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant, and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty children or changes report these signs and symptoms to your doctor if th occur. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. do not use if you have prostate or breast cancer. serious side effects could include

increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet, or body swelling; enlarged or painful breast problems breathinghile sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redss or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrh, vomiting, and increase in psa. see your doctor, and for a 30-day free trial, go to axir.com. music is a universal language. but when i was in an accident... i was worried the healthe system spoke a language all its own with unitedhealthcare, i got help that fit my life. information on my phone. nnection to doctors who get where i'm from. so i never missed a beat. my care may cost. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for mo than 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

>> no substantive progress has been made in talks between the white house and the house over the last two weeks. listen, this is not a game. >> all you have to do is just listen to what's happening out there and you know there is progress. liz: really? the blame game continues. it is pretty clear there is long way to go before a deal is reached in the fiscal cliff talks but what is really happening behind the scenes we're not hearing about? there has to be something,

right? this is my theory. illinois republican congressman peter roskam is the house chief deputy whip. welcome to the show. >> thank you. liz: what do you think? please tell me, it's going better behind the scenes than it seems to be going from the outside here, right? >> well, look --. liz: oh. >> house republicans are working, yes, speaker boehner put new ground on the table for house gop. that is to say we're willing to talk about revenues which is groundbreaking for house republicans. the president seems to be in full campaign mode right now. i think it was a mistake for him to go to asia but that is his prerogative. now he is out doing campaign events and stoking up the campaign base in order to win one fifth or one-fourth of the debate and that is is on the revenue side. but we haven't heard anything substantive from the white house in three weeks about spending cuts. where are the savings? liz: right. >> if the president has described architecture of three to one ratio between

savings to revenues, we litigated the revenue side, but on the savings side we have heard absolutely nothing. liz: you litigated revenue side, what are you willing to give on the revenue side specifically? >> okay. so house republicans said we're willing to put new revenues on the table and we're willing to discuss those. remember, --. liz: but how? you're not willing to raise marginal rate. you're willing to close loopholes? >> that is it exactly and moving it through growth. think about it. we're a party that beliefs that washington, d.c. --. liz: do you have very specific. i'm right here with you. i want to figure out where we are in this because it is so hard to hear. what loopholes do you want to close? >> look there is whole host of them you can discuss in the context of tax reform? liz: give me three. >> hear is the irony. you and i have been talking three minutes. entire three minutes we're talking about one quarter of this equation. we haven't heard anything --. liz: because that is on the side you're asking revenues

of. and i totally agree with you. we heard nothing about spending cuts. that has to happen going forward. i totally concede your point without question but from your side closing loopholes and revenue which is what the other side is demanding give me like three revenue, three loopholes you close. give me three examples. >> i will not give you three specific examples right now. liz: why? >> because i'm a deputy whip. i don't want to get strung out put something together that isn't sustainable from a house republican point of view. liz: can you tell me without telling me specifics are, don't tell me what they are, have you ever offered them specific loopholes. >> no. it is a general discussion. when the speaker of the house says to the president of the united states, we're willing to put revenues on the table, in the past that was good enough for president obama when he was negotiating with the speaker on the debt ceiling deal. and the question was, what's the number? the president at that point wasn't saying how are you getting to it. we can get to it. here's the thing --. liz: you gave them a number? is that what you're saying, gave them a number how much

revenue it would generate or deductions to eliminate? >> clearly in the last debate during the debt ceiling deal was the president as one number. overplayed his hand and speaker had to walk away. the white house is coming up saying they need another trillion six in revenue? that is not realistic. liz: what is your number. >> i will not give you a number. the point the house republicans are willing to say revenues are part of this conversation. here is what we heard from the white house in terms of offerings on spending. nothing. zip. liz: yeah. >> so they have made, they have made an offering today that is completely not serious. more stimulus spending. unbridled presidential authority to raise the debt ceiling. it is nonsense. they need to get out of campaign mode and --. liz: knowing wants to show their hand and be first guy to lay a card down and open up negotiation and put something out here, here is what i will givee >> we have one president of the united states, one. it is the president's job to

lead. the speaker laid out a pathway two days after the election. we have not seen the type of presidential leadership that i know the president is capable of. liz: congressman, make me feel better here on a scale of one to money how close are we to a deal? what do you say? >> two. liz: two? >> listen, i tend to be optimist but this offering today from the white house, is just like got to be kidding me? this is like a lounge act. they're not serious. come up with a substantive proposal that house republicans can consider. we're trying to get to yes. we're not going to get to foolish though. liz: i hear you. thanks for coming on. we appreciate it. >> thank you. liz: yeah. not going to work out, is it? no, it is not. next on "money", be careful what you say out loud. it might cost you a million bucks. a jury delivers an unprecedented ruling all over a rapper's reward for finding his lost laptop. at the end of the day this one is really all about money.

♪ . i always wait until the last minute.

can i still ship a gift in time r christmas? yeah, sure you can. great. where's your gift? uh... whew. [ male announcer ] break from the holiday stress. ship fedexxpress by december 22nd for christmas delivery.

♪ . liz: good music for that.

here is a story that epitomizes the expression, put your money where your mouth is. when a bigshot and big mouth hip-hop rapper or producer ryan leslie lost his laptop he offered a $20,000 reward. if that weren't enough, he you upped his offer to a million bucks. but then guess what? a man found his laptop and returned it. leslie, you said, i was skid kidding with that i will not really pay you. the case ended up in court and leslie lost. fox news legal analyst her said colwin joined my. let me ask you, are you surprised by this? i'm surprised saying i will give a million bucks to anyone that returns my laptop is really binding. >> it is big mouth he has. dude, 20,000, i give you a million. the jury did, what was key though, hey by the way i didn't get everything back. that million dollarses was if i my tracks were on there. ps says, where are they. i returned it.

somehow you're claiming there was damaged and your tracks are missing, you will not pay the million dollars. where is the laptop? it is not there? you have to pay. liz: reason it was worth a million bucks that there were songs he had recorded. that's why he wanted it back. he said when he got it back they weren't there. i think one of the most interesting things about this case is that after about 45 minutes the jurors sent a note out saying they were divided because they felt like million bucks was too high. at that point they were told they couldn't compromise. all or nothing. if you're the lawyer at that point, you would think, oh, that is it, say the price is too high and let it go. he must have been feeling real good. >> if i were the lawyer for leslie dropped to my niece to beg them to settle. the jury was finding for the guy. million dollars for a laptop? it is a lot of money. that's why they found against leslie. liz: why do you think a settlement wasn't made somewhere along the way? obviously this is a show about money. it teaches you the lesson,

if you million bucks on something it wouldn't make sense to make a deal ahead of time and lose something less than that. what do you think? >> exactly right. i think leslie is like, you know what? he is in germany. it will cost him a lot of money. he will not come to the states. is really going to pursue this? by the way, i'm a hip-hop guy. i like street creed. liz: cred. >> yes. liz: in germany we only eat the chicken after it plucked how binding is it? if you say for example, i have my new book out i keep saying. melissa: great book by the way. read the book.

melissa: thank you. buy the book, if you read the first couple pages and doesn't hook you i send your money back. megyn kelly loses it. you have to stop saying that. i'm a lawyer. you will get in trouble. when you say something like all of these things out loud, is that a contract? melissa: yes. if you make an offer and that person accepts it and does something in reliance of that offer, you're stuck. it is a great book, so you will never have to return any money. melissa: i stand behind my two page challenge of diary of a stage mortgage's daughter. i would never offer a million dollars to get my computer back. melissa: that is foolish. melissa: back it up somewhere else. i don't know. very funny story. thank you so much. here is our question of the day. should people be held responsible for rewards that they advertise? of course they should be. we want to hear what you think. like us on facebook.com/melissa france sis fox or twitter at melissaafrancis. next on "money", it

doesn't melt in your mouth or hands but how about a blowtorch? heat-resistant chocolate makes its debut. that can't be good. you can never have too much money or too much chocolate. ♪ .

♪

melissa: select our new graphics. it's time for spare change. our very own as beyond team. thanks to both of you. always so much fun. first up, if you need a place for your elderly parents to live, look no further than this $125,000 bond that you can buy. it is the granny pawed. >> a granny pot. melissa: that will work calling it. twelve by 24 feet. designed to fit in the backyard of a standard home. i have to tell you, it looks small. this is a massive apartment. sprawling living. >> for folks who are used to more space, texas folks this is like cruel and unusual punishment, but for manhattan, i could put a whole family there. melissa: that's like a million-dollar home here. >> i think it's again at the end. melissa: i think it's hysterical

i get an e-mail from my mother the other day. they took this age test as said it would live and some 92 years older something like this. so do one of these pods ready. she heard about it. she calls it prefab. >> may be something like that. find a way of fixing it around an apartment in new york. sticking it out there. melissa: is it me, hundred 25,000? it seems expensive. >> is like a trailer in your backyard. melissa: remember. he is coming air-conditioning to my twilit. you have to have plumbing. >> in addition to the house. melissa: moving done, a new kind of chocolate that won't melt in your hand. it does not seem to know that all. stays solid, even after being heated for three hours. that raises some very, very obvious questions in my mind.

>> like whether it's really -- melissa: why would you consume if you have chocolate that won't melt at that temperature? safe to consume? >> i would not trusted. melissa: i get the complete opposite. i like to put it in the freezer or the refrigerator so it is called. i'm not into melted chocolate. melissa: you would love this. it will not melt. it's perfect. melissa: they put this through he tests, in an oven for 24 hours. something weird about it. >> iiteresting to see how well this cells. they thought this was a genius marketing idea. >> you can't mail it because you fear it's going to go through each. >> do you like it? >> a great idea. if it's effective and good. melissa: we will tasted. maybe we will have david. all right. next story. starbucks is not cheap. they will start selling a

special cup of joe for $7. only being sold in seattle and portland, of course. starbucks says it is worth the price. the beans which are grown in costa rica, come from an ancient line of plants originally from ethiopia. that makes it worth $7. >> this is not so. it reminds me of that wonderful scene in the bucket last where jack nicholson as fancy coffee until he finds out that it is actually beans even by sumatran cats, they defecate the beans in their something about the stomach acid that gives it a distinctive flavor. i'm going to try to say this on television. he have to watch the movie for the priceline. melissa: i know you love your red wine. you don't say that it's crazy that you go by f-15 work until a glass of red wine. some people go hang out at coffee houses.

what want to treat themselves to a premium coffee. >> i stand corrected. melissa: here's our next. if you are on japan airlines, offering what they are calling fair kentucky trade. it comes with the fast-food chains drumstick, chicken breast, flatbread, coleslaw, and it tells -- has a special manas. search for a limited time. what do you guys think? >> no way. >> i disagree. >> have you ever been on a fight with somebody who brings on -- >> let me speak up for comfort food for a second. >> is up about comfort. [talking over each other] >> the fact is sometimes you're in foreign environments. i was in abu dhabi. i get sick of the food. i went to a potpies. it was so nice to have comfort food.